TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 717X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt the dispute is occurred in acquisition of land and accordingly further bargain was taken place. The fact that the assessee clearly mentioned that this agreement was rejected, and the assessee further made a separate deal about the property and paid the value as decided during the registration. Copy of the ITR audited balance sheet as proof of payment is annexed - The issue was already dealt before the DCIT and the submission is annexed. We find that there is a reasonable explanation about the assessee for reduction of the value of the property as prior agreement to sale. We are not intervening in the order of the CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. - I.T.A. No.56/Asr/2015 - - - Dated:- 15-3-2023 - Dr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earch is perverse. 5. The Appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal on or before the appeal is heard and disposed off. 6. It is prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored on merits. 2. Brief fact of the case is that theassessee is aggrieved against the order of the Assessing Officer making an addition of Rs. 3,40,00,000/- under section 69 of the Act. The search u/s 132 of the Actwas conducted in the case of the assessee on 07.04.2011 and consequently assessment proceeding was initiated by issue of notice under section 153A. The ld. AO has brought on record the fact that the assessee had purchased a piece of land measuring 18 kanal at Amritsar on 23.11.2006 for an amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... failed to obtain and hence the agreements were cancelled and properties were purchased at reduced prices. The ld. AO after considering assessee's reply did not accept the same on the ground that there was documentary evidence of sale consideration at much higher price and registration at lower price could not be accepted leading to addition of Rs.3,40,00,000/-.Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The addition was dismissed. Being dissatisfied the revenue filed appeal before us. 3. The ld. Counsel for assessee vehemently argued and submitted the written submission which is kept in the record. First, the ld. counsel invited our attention in the ld. CIT(A) s order, the relevant paragraph 18 of the said order is extrac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Airport Authorities refuse to grant the permission to raise construction over the land in question and such refusal is received before 30.09.2006, then the present agreement to sell shall be deemed to have been cancelled and the 1st Party shall be liable to refund the earnest money or any other sums which the 1st party may have received from second party. 19. The appellant in support of this claim before the Assessing Officer also filed two affidavits from the impugned sellers in the said agreement to sell confirming the cancellation of the agreement, refund of certain amounts in consequence thereof and the reasons for cancellation of agreement being inability on the part of the sellers to organize the requisite crucial permissions t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 29-34 found at the above office an agreement dated 01.05.2006 for the purchase of 16 kanals 1 maria of land was made by M/s. Shivam Estates for a total sum of Rs. 1.84 Crore @ Rs. 1.42 crore per acre and an advance of Rs. 26.90 lacs was also paid which has been adjusted against the total sale price of the property registered in the name of the assessee. Thus it is apparent that the property has been purchased by making a payment of Rs. 1.34 crore over and above the registered price and this amount is not recorded in the books of accounts. 05. Vide this office letter dated 25.11.2013 the assessee was asked to explain why the difference as above be not treated as the unaccounted investment u/s 69 of the l.T. Act. In response to the above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als from concerned authority circumstances beyond our control and further offered to sell this land in agriculture category at market circle rates prevailing in the area at that time. 8. That this deal had been cancelled mutually and agreement to sell dated 01.05.2006 had become null void. Further, we had returned a sum of Rs.5.00 Lacs in cash to M/s Shivam Estates and balance Rs. 26.94 Lacs could not be returned due to non availability of the fund with us in view of the fact that amount was spent by us in the process of obtaining the necessary permissions. I solemnly verify that the facts stated above are true and nothing material has been concealed. 6. The fact that the assessee clearly mentioned that this agreement was r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
